From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git-pull -tip V2] x86: cpu architecture debug code
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 13:28:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090310122806.GE5794@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1236684201.3301.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:
> Added more features, now it supports:
> 1. TSS (GPR, Segment, Eflags)
> 2. Control Regs
> 3. DT (IDT, GDT, LDT, TR)
> 4. Debug regs
> 5. LAPIC
> 6. MSRs
looks pretty good!
A few small details:
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/smp.h>
> +#include <linux/regset.h>
> +#include <linux/sched.h>
> +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
> +#include <linux/seq_file.h>
> +#include <asm/desc.h>
> +#include <asm/cpu_debug.h>
Please use the include files style as can be seen in
arch/x86/mm/fault.c. The reason why we do it is to reduce
conflicts when files are modified by multiple topic branches at
once.
> + vendor = per_cpu(cpu_model, cpu) >> 16;
> + modelflag = per_cpu(cpu_modelflag, cpu);
> + index = get_cpu_range_count(cpu);
> + for (i = 0; i < index; i++) {
please put a newline before loops in such cases, to make it
stand out some more.
> +/* This function can also be called with seq = NULL for printk */
> +static void print_msr(struct seq_file *seq, unsigned cpu, unsigned flag)
> +{
> + int i, range;
> + u32 low, high;
> + unsigned msr, msr_min, msr_max;
> + struct cpu_private *priv;
please try to order local variables like this:
> + unsigned msr, msr_min, msr_max;
> + struct cpu_private *priv;
> + u32 low, high;
> + int i, range;
(this is done for similar reasons as the include files section
ordering)
this affects other functions in the file too.
> +static const struct seq_operations cpu_seq_ops = {
> + .start = cpu_seq_start,
> + .next = cpu_seq_next,
> + .stop = cpu_seq_stop,
> + .show = cpu_seq_show,
> +};
Please use consistent vertical alignment wherever possible
thoughout the file, i.e.:
> + .start = cpu_seq_start,
> + .next = cpu_seq_next,
> + .stop = cpu_seq_stop,
> + .show = cpu_seq_show,
(note this applies to other places too in this same file.)
> +static int cpu_seq_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> + int err;
> + struct seq_file *seq;
> + struct cpu_private *priv = inode->i_private;
> +
> + err = seq_open(file, &cpu_seq_ops);
> + mutex_lock(&cpu_debug_lock);
> + if (!err) {
> + seq = file->private_data;
> + seq->private = priv;
> + }
> + mutex_unlock(&cpu_debug_lock);
what is the purpose of the locking here? What other codepath
can race with this?
> + priv = kzalloc(sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (priv == NULL)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&cpu_debug_lock);
> + priv->cpu = cpu;
> + priv->type = type;
> + priv->reg = reg;
> + priv->file = file;
> + per_cpu(priv_arr[type], cpu) = priv;
> + per_cpu(cpu_priv_count, cpu)++;
> + mutex_unlock(&cpu_debug_lock);
what's the purpose of the locking here and why does it cover
more than just the per_cpu() related critical section?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-10 12:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-10 11:23 [git-pull -tip V2] x86: cpu architecture debug code Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-10 12:28 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-03-10 15:09 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-10 15:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-10 16:09 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-10 17:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-10 23:55 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-11 10:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-11 11:25 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-11 11:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-13 7:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-03-13 8:07 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-11 11:54 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-11 12:45 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-11 12:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-11 13:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-11 13:43 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-11 13:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-13 7:37 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-03-10 17:48 ` [tip:x86/debug] " Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-03-10 19:53 ` [git-pull -tip V2] " Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-03-10 22:00 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090310122806.GE5794@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jaswinder@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox